Does the above mean I will turn into a complete idiot and blame the liberal media as if they pulled the trigger?

Perhaps this is a ploy to nationalize media?
Media is too crazy so govt. HAS NO CHOICE but to take over like it's North Korea?

Bill Maher was on Anderson Cooper and said that the shooter spoke of competing currencies and Gold, who else talks about that other than the Tea
Party?

That's like saying "Jeff has a beard, Jeff is greek, therefore all greeks have beards"

Everywhere on liberal media they are taking the piss out of this news is the most disgusting way possible!!!

Innocent people died and all they do rather than mourn is use it as a tool for partisan bickering???

When Tea Partiers have banners saying "Take Our Country Back" Liberals completely paint the extreme as if it MUST be a form of a militia rethoric that
equates to a call to arms, as opposed to simply voting within a republic and bringing the country back to constitutionalism.

Is that extremism???

This is NOT about a noble act of wanting to tone down rethoric, this is The War On The Tea Party!!!

I have watched MSNBC for the last 2 hours. I now believe that since "ED" hunts pheasants in ND that all we need is 3 sheels each for our shotguns no
more no less. Chris Matthews is disgusted by the way that Govt. Palin has not commented on her "crosshairs" campaign ad. These people are trying to
capitalize on this unbelievably incoherent guys actions to try to change as many laws as quickly as possible. Why can't people that make at least
$175,000 (congress) make laws without some sort of crisis?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
When Tea Partiers have banners saying "Take Our Country Back" Liberals completely paint the extreme as if it MUST be a form of a militia rethoric
that equates to a call to arms, as opposed to simply voting within a republic and bringing the country back to constitutionalism.

OK so these guys are only kidding?

Give me a break. When you make overt threats I think the message is quit simple to understand. Not blaming Palin directly mind you, but where
ther's smoke there is usually fire.

Everywhere on liberal media they are taking the piss out of this news is the most disgusting way possible!!!

I am not disagreeing with you, but I hope people realize that it's not just the "liberal" media doing a disservice. Faux is just as responsible for
pushing people's buttons.
You speak of Marr and Cooper, but in your analysis, surely Beck and Hannity would fit on that list of sensationalist inaccuracies and
generalizations.
Point is there are just too many time slots for the news organizations to fill and unfortunately, most of that becomes garbage and attacks.
Do I think some attacks on the Tea Party are unfair? Yes I do, but to blame all or most of today's "madness" on the "liberal" media without including
both sides is not healthy or accurate.
I'm just saying if your going to dish it out, be sure to include all of the vitriol rhetoric. Is the Liberal media unfairly painting the
teaparty? Yes
Is Faux news unfairly painting situations? Yes. So the madness comes from all sides, and blaming one side is disingenuous imho.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Give me a break. When you make overt threats I think the message is quit simple to understand. Not blaming Palin directly mind you, but where
ther's smoke there is usually fire.

The message is loud and clear.

1. Provide the link between such political speech and Loughner's actions.

2. Explain why the millions of people subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric have committed no violence at all.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Explain why the millions of people subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric have committed no violence at all.

I'll respond as a courtesy to back my opinion, which is more than I can expect from the likes of you.

Ummm. There are NUMEROUS reports of death threats, office vandalism and outbursts at Town hall meetings. Sadly, I suspect the violence is
escalating. There are plenty of nut job dirt bags out there looking for a cause.

It's just subterfuge, misdirection, and divide & conquer. It's also been blamed on immigration, they're already looking at gun control stuff. There
are assuredly many agendas to this, but to frame it as liberal vs. conservative is a bit off the mark. It may be political assassination of specific
politicians (I read something framing this as a way to take out Palin-don't agree with that perspective, but it's in the discourse.) The idea that
people still think there is a liberal media bias (it is in fact quite the opposite) or that there really is a left or right in American politics any
more (it's all just the corporation under the guise of political theater.

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Give me a break. When you make overt threats I think the message is quit simple to understand. Not blaming Palin directly mind you, but where
ther's smoke there is usually fire.

The message is loud and clear.

1. Provide the link between such political speech and Loughner's actions.

1. Provide the justification for demanding that anyone provide you the link between such political speech and Loughner's actions.

2. Explain why the millions of people subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric have committed no violence at all.

2. Explain why anyone should be subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric if these signs and political rhetoric are not
specifically and intentionally designed to suggest the potential for "righteous violence" if not taken seriously.

Seriously though, no one actually expects yoiu to provide any answers. You demands answers. You don't provide answers. That's not your board
schtick.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Explain why the millions of people subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric have committed no violence at all.

I'll respond as a courtesy to back my opinion, which is more than I can expect from the likes of you.

Ummm. There are NUMEROUS reports of death threats, office vandalism and outbursts at Town hall meetings. Sadly, I suspect the violence is
escalating. There are plenty of nut job dirt bags out there looking for a cause.

That's not an answer. That's simply a claim that there are some nuts out there. I'll try again.

Explain why the millions of people subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric have committed no violence at all.

Also, you avoided the first question.

Please provide the proof that such political rhetoric motivated Loughner's actions.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
What they are basically saying is that Jared Loughner is innocent however Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and every member of the Tea Party are the ones who
pulled the trigger.

I agree it's been harsh, I don't think your examples really justify or prove this OP statement. I haven't seen anyone say JLL is innocent. And there's
been a lot of talk about how creepy the correlation between the smack talk from the ilk of Palin is compared to what happened. I don't think anyone
can deny that it is creepy that she had crosshairs trained on Giffords and Giffords was shot.

Also, the meme that the Tea Party has only a Christian conservative Republican base? Really?

P.S. This left vs. right, tit for tat pissing contest meme is getting REALLY old too. Be better than that.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
What they are basically saying is that Jared Loughner is innocent however Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and every member of the Tea Party are the ones who
pulled the trigger.

First...I do not think this type of approach is best, but that is just my opinion. I understand the frustration that the OP has presented.

But seriously, we can find hundreds of photos from all walks of life that can be twisted and distorted to fit this punk ass loser kid who decided that
he was more important and more special than any one of the folks he put a bullet into.

Political rhetoric did not drive this kid and if it did, please show me the evidence you are using to support that claim.

Sarah Palin's map did not drive this kid to murder, again, show me the evidence.

Environmentalist ideology did not drive this kid to murder.

The song B-I-N-G-O might have, but that one is still up for debate.

-----------------------

It is sad to see so many clamp onto this as if it were the holy grail you have been seeking to finally impose restrictions upon speech you disagree
with. It is sad that those that have advocated the freedom of speech here within the boards are the very ones now using this take aim at those they
disagree with. It is sad that not more than 2 damn days later all you people think about is how to best use this in your weak arguments that people
that have an ideology different than yours can finally be 'officially' shut up.

Originally posted by NorEaster
1. Provide the justification for demanding that anyone provide you the link between such political speech and Loughner's actions.

Because it's relative to the OP and the current trend of bashing the right's rhetoric because of Loughner's action.

2. Explain why anyone should be subjected to the messages on these signs and political rhetoric if these signs and political rhetoric are not
specifically and intentionally designed to suggest the potential for "righteous violence" if not taken seriously.

Obviously it represents constituents discontent. The surprising lack of violence as a result of these signs demands explanation if you claim
otherwise.

Seriously though, no one actually expects yoiu to provide any answers. You demands answers. You don't provide answers. That's not your board
schtick.

I answered. You didn't and instead just asked more questions. I expect this though since my questions drive the point home that these accusations
against the right are exploitative and unfounded.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.